Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
7.5
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering enhances reliability, reduces downtime, prevents crashes, and offers a 200% ROI by identifying system issues early.
Sentiment score
7.3
LoadRunner Professional offers strong ROI with reduced downtime, improved performance, and cost savings, justifying its initial investment.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.2
OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering's support quality varies, with experiences ranging from excellent service to slow responses and unhelpful documentation.
Sentiment score
6.1
OpenText LoadRunner Professional support varies, with mixed feedback on responsiveness; community forums are often used for assistance.
The customer service and technical support for OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is reasonable, not impressive, but provides adequate assistance.
If I need to rate support from one to ten, I would say it is a nine.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
LoadRunner Enterprise scales well and flexibly, but faces challenges with memory use and license costs impacting adoption.
Sentiment score
7.3
OpenText LoadRunner Professional provides scalable testing with high user counts, diverse protocols, but may require careful consideration of resource needs.
I rate the scalability of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) as ten when using a scale from one to ten, with one being low.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.4
LoadRunner Enterprise is generally stable but may face occasional issues due to infrastructure, version upgrades, and maintenance needs.
Sentiment score
7.7
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering is highly stable and reliable, preferred over other tools despite minor bugs.
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise struggles with UI, integration, reporting, support, and pricing, leading users to consider alternatives.
OpenText LoadRunner Professional is expensive and complex, needing simplification, better integration, automation, and enhanced reporting features.
It could be much better, especially with modern AI capabilities.
I find that AI functionality in OpenText LoadRunner Professional should be improved and more accessible.
 

Setup Cost

OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is costly but offers value, requiring careful planning to optimize virtual user license expenses.
OpenText LoadRunner Professional offers flexible scaling and support but may be costly compared to competitors due to additional user fees.
 

Valuable Features

LoadRunner Enterprise enhances testing efficiency with scalability, advanced reporting, integration, and real-time analysis, benefiting global application performance management.
OpenText LoadRunner Professional offers robust scripting, analytics, diverse protocol support, and advanced scaling for efficient performance testing.
The best features of this solution are easy scripting and broad platform support.
The most valuable feature of OpenText LoadRunner Professional is the analysis part that is really good, along with the support for multiple protocols.
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText Enterprise Perform...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
84
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Professional Perfo...
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
4th
Ranking in Load Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) is 5.8%, down from 6.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) is 14.8%, up from 12.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

VictorHorescu - PeerSpot reviewer
Ability to test almost every tool in the companies I enter and performs well in a distributed environment
It would be beneficial if LoadRunner could optimize resource usage, especially for protocols that require significant resources, like TrueClient, which interacts directly with the UI. If they could improve resource usage, like ingest or for the load generator, using less CPU or RAM memory, that would be great. That's where I have problems. In real time, when they ask for 5,000 or 10,000 concurrent users, I have to provision a lot of virtual machines to define this load. Then there are situations with certain platforms, especially document management platforms, where the technology is so weird that normal LoadRunner protocols cannot detect it. So, in that case, I have to use that special TruClient protocol. I have to use the TruClient protocol, which actually clicks on the object. Despite the SQL technology, I can still create a script and test for performance. So what I would appreciate a lot is if this protocol would require less resources on a normal virtual machine. I can use fewer concurrent users with TruClient protocols as opposed to almost one hundred with HTTP/HTML. As opposed to many more with HTTP/HTML from, let's say, JMeter. So, optimization at that level for resource consumption by OpenText would be much appreciated.
HelenSague - PeerSpot reviewer
A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications
I do not have any big challenges with LoadRunner. I only have some issues with load generators. It is a very common issue, and I hope it will be resolved in the latest release. For example, when we start to run our tests, users get the message that the load generator exceeded 80% of the CPU utilization. Even when the number of users is less, we get these messages. I am trying to resolve it, but it is not going. It is annoying. It is not a failure, but I hope that it will be resolved. IBM WebSphere MQ testing can be a bit challenging. It can handle that, but I hope that they will build more and more capabilities. We do a huge amount of testing for messaging. Just like aviation, the railway industry is based on messaging. There is messaging to build trains and messaging to create some bills. There are many train movements. Everything involves messaging. I wish that it will be developed more for IBM WebSphere testing. Monitoring is okay, but for testing, I currently have to create Java users. I have to load a lot of libraries from IBM WebSphere and so on.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user104961 - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 13, 2014
LoadRunner vs NeoLoad
The six phases of an IT project Enthusiasm Disillusionment Panic Search for the guilty Punishment of the innocent (the performance tester) Praise and rewards for the incompetent non-participants This article has been put together as part of an evaluation of the performance test tools NeoLoad and…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
Now that LoadRunner integrates with Dynatrace and other monitoring tools, it simplifies the process of integration into a company, taking merely five minutes to set up. This ease of integration a...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
In 2019, I was dealing with the costs of LoadRunner. While I don't remember the exact figures, JMeter being free and RPT being cheaper makes them attractive. The high cost of LoadRunner, in contras...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?
While I don't see any issues with LoadRunner's functionality, the cost of the tool is a major factor. Many of my customers have had to switch to different tools due to the cost of LoadRunner, despi...
What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
When designing a workload model offers a good range of possibilities for creating goal-oriented scenarios, which helps us understand and meet SLAs.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional?
I would like to improve OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on what we discussed in our last discussion, as those points remain similar and applicable. For future updates, I would like to see th...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner, HPE LoadRunner, LoadRunner
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
JetBlue, GOME, Australian Red Cross Blood Service, RMIT University, Virgin Media
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs. OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.